Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review

At first glance, the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 looks a lot like Sony's Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 large sensor, long zoom camera, but there's a precedent within the company's own range. It's been eight years since the FZ50 was introduced, so we can't imagine too many people are still waiting, but in some respects it appears Panasonic has finally created a replacement for that much-missed model. Taken as a whole, the FZ1000 can almost be seen as a synthesis between the two cameras.

Like the RX10, the FZ1000 features a 20MP 1"-type MOS sensor (and the suspicion has to be that it's a Sony chip), but, rather than the Sony's 24-200mm equivalent zoom range, the Panasonic reaches from 25 to 400mm equivalent. To stop the whole thing becoming enormous, the FZ1000's lens is slower than the Sony's: its maximum aperture rapidly drops from F2.8 towards F4.0 as you zoom in, but there are plenty of people who'll accept that decrease in return for the additional range.

In spirit, though, the large sensor, long zoom and articulated screen can't help but recall the FZ50, which offered a similar zoom and aperture range, despite featuring a much smaller 1/1.8"-type sensor. The FZ1000 is a similarly sized camera but the eight years of technological development that underpin it mean it's able to offer significantly higher resolution in terms of its viewfinder, rear screen, pixel count and video output. Panasonic has recently been pushing the superzoom sector with the likes of its constant F2.8 DMC-FZ200, but the return to a larger sensor format and a relatively bright lens is exciting.

When the RX10 was launched, it stood alone as a costly but hugely flexible camera that seemed equally intended for stills and video shooting: the ultimate travel camera, perhaps. The launch of the FZ1000 brings both cameras into focus, making clear that camera makers believe there is a niche for cameras that do a bit of everything in a single (albeit sizable) package. The big difference between the two cameras, though, is price: the FZ1000's $899.99 / £749.99 launch price is around a third lower than the Sony's was.

Since the FZ1000's launch, Sony US has reduced the list price of the RX10 to $999 and, because it's been on the market for a while, it's available a long way below list price in Europe. This reduces but doesn't abolish the gap in price between the two cameras, and it'll be interesting to see what street price the Panasonic settles to, after a few months.

Its use of a fast readout sensor and the four-core Venus processor means the FZ1000 becomes one of the first sub-$1000 cameras to capture 4K video. Anyone wanting footage they can show immediately will have the choice of shooting 1080p movies at 60, 30 or 24 fps (50, 25 and 24 in PAL countries). The video capability is supported by the inclusion of focus peaking, zebra exposure warnings, center point marker and 'Cinema-like' gamma profiles.

Key Features:

20.1 megapixel 1"-type MOS sensor

25-400mm equiv. F2.8-4 Leica lens

5-axis 'Power OIS' stabilization

XGA OLED electronic viewfinder with 2.36M dots

3-inch fully-articulated LCD with 920K dots

4K (3840x2160) video at 30p, 100Mbps MP4

1080p at up to 60p, 28Mbps (MP4 or AVCHD)

120fps quarter-speed 1080p

3.5mm microphone socket

Clean HDMI output

Zebra pattern and focus peaking

Wi-Fi with NFC

360 shots per charge (CIPA standard)

It's not only the Venus processor that the FZ1000 shares with the GH4, it also features many of its customizable control points. These aren't quite so numerous as on its interchangeable lens cousin, due to the lack of touchscreen, but they're still pretty welcome on a 'compact' camera. The FZ1000 also offers the kind of hard-point controls, such as an AF drive mode switch and AEL button, that rarely make an appearance below the enthusiast interchangeable lens camera level.

The FZ1000 also gains the GH4's 'DFD focusing' - a means of determining roughly how far it needs to refocus, based on an understanding of the characteristics of the lens in out-of-focus regions. This aims to play the same basic role of on-sensor phase detection: a way of assessing the distance the camera needs to focus on, so that it can rush the lens to near that point before using contrast-detection to establish perfect focus.

The camera also features an in-camera Raw conversion option, which is a very welcome addition, letting you tweak a range of image parameters after you've taken a shot, applying different noise reduction and Photo Styles or making adjustments to brightness or the highlight and shadow response.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Comparison

The FZ1000's only real competitor is Sony's RX10, which also tries to offer a flexible zoom range plus high quality stills and video in a single package. We're also including the current breadwinner in Panasonic's superzoom lineup, the DMC-FZ200.

Panasonic DMC-FZ1000

Sony DSC-RX10

Panasonic DMC-FZ200

Sensor

20.1MP MOS

20.2MP BSI-CMOS

12.1MP MOS

Sensor Size (mm2)

116

116

28

Equivalent zoom range

25-400mm

24-200mm

25-600mm

Aperture range

F2.8-4.0

F2.8

F2.8

Equivalent aperture range

F7.6-10.8

F7.6

F15.5

Video recording formats

AVCHD, MP4

AVCHD, MP4

AVCHD, MP4

Maximum video resolution

3840x2160

1920x1080

1920x1080

Highest bitrate (for 1080p footage)

28Mbps (1080p60)

28Mbps (1080p60)

28Mbps (1080p60)

Battery life (Shots-per-charge, CIPA)

360

420

540

Built-in ND filter?

No

Yes

No

Dimensions (WxHxD)

137 x 99 x 131mm

129 x 89 x 120mm

125 x 87 x 107mm

Weight

831g

813g

588g

The lens

What does this mean in the real world, though? Have a look at the equivalent aperture comparison chart below:

Just like 'equivalent focal length,' equivalent apertures allow you to compare lens behavior side-by-side across cameras with different sensor sizes, by taking sensor size into account. The equivalent aperture figure gives a clear idea of how two lenses compare in terms of depth-of-field. It also gives an idea of low-light performance, since it also describes how much light is available across the sensor's area. However, differences in sensor performance mean this can only be used as a guide, rather than an absolute measure.

The FZ1000's maximum aperture drops off very quickly, as soon as you start to zoom, and by around 150mm equivalent, it's a whole stop slower than the Sony RX10. However, this still leaves it half a stop faster than the likes of the Olympus Stylus 1. On top of this, the FZ1000's lens then continues on to a very impressive 400mm equivalent focal length.

Comments

I bought the FZ 1000 after using the FZ 50 recommended by another pro for a light weight pack camera...and have to say i a'm very happy with camera for alot of reasons . tooo many newbies think they need all the bells and whistles and in reality as a pro we need something that has a sharp lens with a workable f stop because most of what i shoot is on a tri-pod . I was shocked at the prints i have made on my Epson wide format printer even at 400mm . It is not the box but the len's that i look for . Good Glass give's you good prints...and this thing has beautiful glass for something under $900 . Love It !

To DPReview: Thanks for the exellent comparison. It would also be nice to see lens comparison at 35, 50 and 85/100 mm equivalents. For example on the studio test scene at 60mm Pana has definitely sharper image in the center and 2/3 outside (cards). So those focus lengths are much more usefull than telezoom extremes such as 200 or 400mm.

So this is a really interesting option and probably the best point-and-shoot camera available today. A true bridge camera.

But, for that same amount of money or less, you can get a two-lens DSLR or mirrorless camera kit.

"Sure," you say. But those lenses aren't as fast. You'd be right, they're not. But with larger sensors, you can make up for the slower lenses by dialing up the ISO. You get more ISO flexibility with a mirrorless or DSLR camera by 1-2 stops, which makes up for it.

In terms of shallow depth of field, you won't get it with a camera like this, as you can see with the "equivalent aperture" charts.

Instead, spend your $800-900 on a two-lens ILC kit and then go find a used portrait prime lens somewhere.

The only real advantage of a camera like this over entry-level interchangeable lens cameras is that you don't have to carry QUITE as much around because it's an all-in-one solution. But this is a pretty bulky camera considering it's just a very good point & shoot.

That's a terrible comparison. Someone after a single lens solution isn't going to bother with getting 2 lenses they need to swap and an additional prime lens. Also I'm not sure you'll find many MILC cameras starting from 25mm and ending at 400mm. Most start at 28mm and end at 300mm. Closest MILC to this would be the Panasonic G7 with the 14-140 lens (28-280mm vs 25-400mm) which also has 4k. This is still cheaper and has a bigger range. There is nothing else on the market.

Yes, the consumer is after better photos. This 1inch sensor and huge zoom range is already a massive step up from their smartphones. This bridge camera is more convenient than having to switch lenses all the time, and those kit lenses do not compare to the lens on the FZ1000, and especially when you have to stop down to f/8 to get good results. You don't understand how the average consumer thinks. Convenience is of high priority, and convenience is what the FZ1000 delivers. A 2 lens bulkier DSLR kit is just not comparable.

One great thing about Micro 4/3 is that almost every lens is designed to be shot wide open. They are so sharp you don't need to stop them down. Almost every review of Micro 4/3 lenses that I read says something like, "This lens is so sharp you won't have a problem using it wide open...how do they do it?" That includes the kit lenses.

I can't really comment on the kit lenses for consumer DSLRs.

If you're savvy enough to care about sensor size and lens aperture (and you're spending $800 on a camera), the simple task of switching lenses is probably not a huge burden. Some enthusiasts might say, "Wow, I can get a camera with an f2.8-f4 25-400mm equivalent lens for $800!" not realizing what they lose in ISO flexibility. I almost got sucked in by it myself.

The FZ1000 and RX10 would be a huge hit at $500 or even $600. But $800 or more is asking just a bit too much. Give the RX10 a teleconverter and

I already have two Pentax APS-C DSLR bodies, one of which is the flagship K3. I also have 8 enthusiast quality lenses including a Sigma 120-400. But I can walk around with my FZ1000 and be ready for almost anything, including birds in flight. The combination of 400mm reach with very fast and accurate autofocus is simply not available in a light, compact and affordable DSLR combo.

If I set out to take carefully composed shots of stationary subjects, then of course I'll use my Pentax equipment. But I will definitely keep my FZ1000, and probably sell some of my Pentax kit. Some experienced guys have completely abandoned their DSLR kits in favor of the FZ1000, which is much more than a "very good point and shoot".

4K video is a lot of fun. Reading the comments here (assuming these are legit people, who knows?) this particular Pana is not a great camera for video (noise, build quality, functionality of the controls) and expensive for a mega-zoom.I really like the control ring, but as the reviewer noted, even that isn't quite properly done (for lack of a good grip on the lens) so I think this is a "wait for version 2" product.

What makes 4K so interesting to me is that you can take 8 MP photos with a 24 fps burst rate. Video is, after all, just a series of photographs. How good is that if you're shooting action?

Also, the FZ1000 has a long lens (400mm in full-frame terms) with, at worst, an f4 aperture. Now think how much that would cost and how bulky that would be with even a mirrorless camera let alone a DSLR.

I have published two examples of photos taken with my Canon SX10 and my Panasonic FZ1000. The photos are taken from the same location on a tripod. I set the cameras to their widest angle and used Aperture priority F8. The SX10 was set to ISO80 and the FZ1000 to ISO 125.

http://www.freshfordsomerset.co.uk/photosurvey_freshford.php

I was quite surprised that there wasn't a major difference between the two cameras.

I did not like the body work but particularly the play in the on/off and lens levers (absurd for the Leica model). The camera worked impressively but I returned it based on the body which I do not think will hold up well in any level of precipitation.

Whenever I'm outside in daylight, I"ll wear polarized sunglasses. I've read that the EVF of the FZ1000 in landscape position cannot be used with polarized sunglasses. If that's true, can I use the lcd screen in landscape position to take pictures? I think most photos are probably taken in landscape, so I was a little surprised that the EVF could not be used if you're wearing polarized sunglasses. Perhaps someone who wears polarized sunglasses and has used the FZ1000 could help me out on this. I looked through the review and the posts below and didn't find this information. Thank you for any help or suggestions.

Actually, in my case anyway, it's the back display that appears dark while wearing polarised sunglasses and holding the camera horizontal. Turning my head a few degrees left or right fixes that. Holding the camera vertical (portrait mode) also. The EVF works fine with my sunglasses.

I had the chance to look at some videos taken with the FZ1000. Why do they appear "choppy?" It looks like they record then skip a beat the record some more. Honestly I'm interested in the camera for photos and not videos, but of course I'd like quality video as well. I'm looking to replace my FZ28. Can anybody comment on what I'm seeing and why the video looks like that? Thanks!

I found it to be very annoying, and I really didn't like it humming over my indoor video. It's quite audible on scenes that should be quiet, with no zooming or focusing and certainly no wind. I wondered if maybe the DPR test camera didn't have the noise, since they make no mention of it. But their sample video inside the bar has it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YS7a4F3aiYU

That video sounds as if the camera was out on a busy street, not indoors.

I know about the noise, but i use a Rode stereo video-mic pro, so it is not a problem for me, i know it can be for some, however, this is a camera that demands the best and for serious video work like i do i would never use any camera mic whatsoever, there is another thread somewhere regarding this noise and workarounds.

It's worth reading for anyone thinking of doing vid with this camera. There is also a discussion on the Amazon user's forum.

To give an idea of the volume, it is very obvious when standing by the camera in a quiet place, or around your neck, and very obvious on video with the volume set highish, viewed in a quiet room. If you put your ear to the body, it is loud.

However, I took it back to the shop in a shopping mall, and there was no hope of hearing it. I put my ear to the camera in the shopping mall, and still couldn't hear it - just the 'seashell effect'.

So it's about quiet situations, and no good for 'atmos' recordings. The external mic is the solution, though sometimes inconvenient, but I've had to extend mine to 50mm higher than the hotshoe to avoid the external mic recording the noise.

Does this not have an "auto" mode for people who want to use it as a point and shoot? Looking for a travel zoom for my daughter, who would like to take advantage of the larger sensor and image quality, but probably will not want to spend much time on all the settings. Thanks.

The more I use the FZ-1000, the more I'm convinced it's the mirrorless body Canon and Nikon should have made for their lens systems but didn't.

Imagine this with an APS-c sensor and an EF mount. Or a DX sensor and F-mount. A big percentage of SLR users would add it as a body that's better integrated into video use than an SLR. They'd have sold millions.

Instead of that Canikon mucked around with odd-ball things for restricted markets, and Panasonic has had to do the sensible thing instead. But to accommodate a compact do-everything fixed lens, it needed a small sensor, which is a bit too rough for bigger print sizes in stills.

So we have a somewhat compromised version of a Canikon mirrorless body, with it's own lens. But it still complements Canon or Nikon SLR gear quite well. I'd call it the first non-fiddly mirrorless body that handles like an SLR and doesn't require Canikon users to invest in an expensive duplicate lens system.

A3 is more than big enough for me and the FZ1000 can achieve this no probs, also it can hold its own against the APS-C format easily, this is the future, DSLRs will soon be a specialist item in a few years, this camera kicks the butt off the old Canon 60d and 28-250 Sigma lens i had, got rid of them on E-Bay when i purchased the FZ1000, its also lighter and far more convenient than an SLR.

I have ordered my Panasonic FZ1000 yesterday on amazon.de for 699,00 euros. The price is not too bad for what I will get in the end I think.

I also ordered 2x 64GB SDXC UHS-I U3 memory cards (39,34 euro each) so for total amount of 789,- euro's (included shipping and handling, normally I pay this amount easy for one L-lens for my Canon 6D).

I hope the camera will be fun to play and work with it and that it can be used semi-professional as well in some situations (when it comes to 4K video editing and so on). Also 4K full frame DSLR camera's are a bit too expensive for me at this moment, so this would be a nice solution to get the basics right.

Do any users of this camera notice the image shift when zooming out and coming to the stopping point of the widest zoom available? I notice it on mine and it persists no matter what mode I'm shooting in. The image shift becomes very noticeable when the power O.I.S. is disabled and on a tripod. I'm not sure if mine is defective and would value other users' feedback on this.

Is there any way to install North American firmware to European model? I've just bought the FZ1000 and was disappointed to discover that its characteristics are inferior to US version (25 in 4K, 50/100p in hd video).

I read the FZ-1000 at 300mm+ becomes fuzzy. Can anyone confirm if this is true. I am planning on getting this camera for long lens shots and want to avoid the kind of softness I get on my 100-300mm Panasonic at the long end. Thanks.

There are comments about the RX10 having a weather-sealed body, but this is not Sony's claim, they just say "weather- resistant".

I take issue with all such claims as microphones , especially those on the top of bodies cannot exactly be waterproof, and even were they so, the water collecting inside the mic grills would surely stop them working (and probably everything else). If these machines were waterproof there would be ads on TV with footage glorifying in the fact, but other than a few AW compacts there is no such footage available from anyone-including Nikon and Canon pro "weather-sealed" bodies, and apparently it is a fact that the D800 is NOT weatherproof, and though the Canon is more so, the corrosion from water-especially salt water affects them as well. That RX10 isn't waterproof, or dustproof. Sony have not ever said it was and will not refund you or do a free repair on one, I bet, if it gets a soaking over the winter outdoors. The FZ1000 has no such pretences.

Both fail. I have had to return an RX10 for an obvious reason-when you film it insists in recording all focussing and zooming sounds to your footage. Optically the lens is good despite very heavy distortion at 24mm that can only be corrected in software-easily more than 5% barrel. As you get to 200, at f2.8 the one I had was very sharp in the centre, but only a narrow circle in the centre beyond which the fall off was rapid- think adjacent trees in a row of trees equidistant from camera, or a line of people. Even in good light you need that f2.8 but it is of limited use given most of the picture is at a lower resolution.

This is ALL deliberate of course since the zoom for size is underdesigned: at 24mm it certainly does not cover the sensor. That said the Leitz lens on the Panasonic is far worse, and I do mean a LOT worse. So wait for the next models and curse the people who lead you up the garden path to nowhere but frustration

Camera's WA is at 25mm -- in still picture mode, but only in some of the possible aspect ratios.

In 1080p video mode, it is at 27mm (equivalent).

Finally in 4K videeo mode, it is at 37mm (equivalent). So, at 37mm, that is not even a proper WIDE angle.

You must shoot video with this camera in 4K UHD resolution only, otherwise you are recording HD video in the ages old, not too desirable, really low bitrate AVCHD codec, a coeec that seemingly refuses t die. Just ask Panasonic and Sony.

So, would you want to spend $900 on a camera that has a fixed lens that starts at only 37mm (equivalent) when shooting video? Some might, others will not.

I ordered my FZ1000 only for 4K video and I hardly do ultra wide or crazy zoomed in shots, 35mm till lets say 150mm will do the job most of the time. I like to see as much as possible most of the time in video (DOF and so on), so f2.8 is not used often anyway, I like to film most of the time in f5.6-8. The price is really good for what you get imo, especially when you want to start with 4K recording without spending an arm and a leg like I would do with a similar GH4 setup.

Very intersting conclusion. At the moment (9 Dec 2014) the RX10 is 50 EUR cheaper than the FZ1000. The RX10 in the meantime received a new firmware with XAVC-S. The built-in ND filter, the professional-grade (parfocal) zoom lens, excellent XAVC-S codec, professional weather sealed body, cheaper price today makes my decision much harder. My problem with 4K is that to exploit its (great) advantages it requires a huge amount of disk space, and more importantly an enormous amount of post processing time. Decent FullHD video footage is all I'd need. Image stabilization efficiency is another big question. Hmm.

The Sony RX10 is a nice example how meaningless to build high quality body and lenses into this type of camera. Shortly the RX10 was announced the FZ1000 came with higher specifications in a cheap plastic body, and the efforts and energy invested into building the RX10 had been a total waste from Sony. I guess, this is how consumer electronics business works. What a sad story.

Hey Francis, the lesson Sony should learn that not including 4K internal recording may render all their efforts meaningless, since the market, the reviewers all are evaluating a non 4K (professional) camera inferior to a 4K (plastic) gizmo.Hi Mike, I think that Sony simply missed to "play the 4K card" and let Panasonic (and now Samsung) apply the 4K-trick against superior Sony products and they have been taking a huge/significant market share from the advanced enthusiast market during the past months. Sony simply cannot reply to Panasonic/Samsung with a competitive 4K product in this price range. At least Sony should have promised a free 4K upgrade to stay competitive.I absolutely feel respected that you, Mike and Francis have read and commented my messages, and words; thank you so much to help thinking together and understanding/evaluating the events/phenomenae in today's camera business.

The 4K video is not all it's hyped up to be. This mode crops the sensor to 8MP in its center, meaning you lose full wide angle capability and get the image quality of a sensor much smaller than 1". Only slightly bigger than a smartphone's. Thinking about it, all that processing, all that storage space, to get the image quality of a sensor that small.

It's a red herring as far as video quality is concerned, so on video the RX10 is imo the stronger contender.

Hey Mike FL, Are you sure about this 24mm to 37mm crop of the LX100? On this page http://www.eoshd.com/2014/11/shooting-4k-pocket-camera-exceptional-panasonic-lx100/ the reviewer states that "The end results are a 2.4x crop in 4K video mode compared... In stills mode it is a 2.2x crop ... the lens is 10.9mm at the wide end which means you maintain a nice wide 24mm field of view equivalent to full frame in stills mode and 26mm in 4K mode. With the FZ1000 you lose the wide end altogether in 4K mode." I think you meant the 24 to 37 crop for the FZ1000.

Just shooting stills and have an RX10 at the office for a while, the FZ1000 is a superior camera in almost every aspect (unless you really need weather sealing). The f-stop drop at the longer FL is not really a big deal and easily compensated by the longer reach. The lens produces better bokeh, the camera is a noticeable faster in use, better controls and far more customisable so there's less diving into the menus. The EVF is better and the LCD is fully articulating. It weight the same and although larger, in the hand the difference is negligible and neither is small enough to fit in a pocket so no advantage there for the Sony. Build quality does not bother me as I'll most likely replace this within two years and I doubt it will give up on me before then (I shoot A LOT). The Sony just seems clunky to me in stills mode and if shooting RAW the IQ is basically the same (Sony over sharpens their JPGs). Focusing is also far better on the FZ.

Shot for years with a Panny FZ35. After seeing the initial issues with the FujiFilm X-S1 had been fixed I bought one. Seemed like a HUGE step up, going from the 1/2.33" Panny sensor to the 2/3" sensor in the X-S1. Along with all the other "modern" features and the price drop it was a no-brainer for me.I shoot primarily in Aperature Priority mode, going back to my Canon SLR days and have... not... been able to get routinely decent shots with my X-S1. I get noise at 100 ISO. It's crazy. Lot of other issues as well but I'll get to the point - I've been looking into moving up to a DSLR - even the "entry level full frame" Nikon D610 is tough $$-wise when you add in suitable lenses - but the lady at Pro Photo Supply here in Portland showed me the FZ1000. WOW. I was thisclose to buying it right then and there but thought I'd research entirely too much first. ;-) So, question - are you satisfied with your results? Noise? DR? High contrast shots? Would you buy the FZ1000 again? Thanks!

I had a an X-S1, it was a lovely looking camera with that SLR look, superb features at the time also, but! the picture quality was to be polite, `not very nice` very soft, trouble with color white- in loads of cases having a red cast, also whites in many would blow out in decent light, not a very good D/range whatsoever, tried correcting this with its excellent color controls, but still had problems) was never happy with it especially when a friend showed me some pictures from his Canon Sx40 which was far superior, that was enough for me, after 18 days i sold it, bought an Sx40, then later purchased the superb Panasonic FZ200, i have recently sold it and purchased an FZ1000, wow! do i like it? you bet, it is totally superb, the first (for me) perfect bridge camera i have ever owned, the features, the lens, and above all, picture quality and Video especially 4k are all superb, to conclude, as i said earlier, for me, its all the camera i could ever want, all in one!

I meant to add that the FZ1000`S viewfinder is astonishing, i believe its the same one that is on the GH4, clarity is superb, you could forgive yourself for thinking you were looking through an optical one, no eyestrain, much, much better size when viewing through it, unlike the small cramped view you get with most DSLR`s, i love that what you see is what you get with all camera parameters in clear view aiding quick adjuustments, far more chance of getting that all important shot correct with 1 shot before its gone, and with near perfect 100% view in the viewfinder and rear LCD!

Yup, whites are horrible with the X-S1. Shouldn't have to stop down whenever I'm shooting outdoors during the day. Ridiculous and oh so frustrating. Shooting Multnomah Falls I couldn't get around ending up with a long, blown-out verticle white stripe. I understand the obvious benefits of APS-C and FF, but I don't routinely print 24"x36", ya know? And I don't really need the crazy depth of field of the FF. I've been shooting long enough I know how to get the result I want - most likely like most of you - and the past year has been sooo frustrating with the X-S1. The noise drives me nuts! Should not have to spend time in PP. The viewfinder on the X-S1 is massive so I love that the FZ1000 has a great one too. XVOYAGERX - Hey, I really appreciate the response. Thank you. Going to put my X-S1 up for sale after Christmas and "step up" to the FZ1000. Sounds ludicrous to say, but in all my years shooting digital, the Panny has given me the most consistent, quality, usable results.

Hi Fish Lips, Hey my friend, nice to hear from you, Well i hope you sell your XS-1 after Xmas, i just did not like it and i paid nearly £500 for it which thinking back was rather expensive really for what it was, nice looking camera and very well built, but awful picture, however, i think like me you will love the FZ1000, it is a far superior camera and simply blows the XS-1 out of the water both in features and most importantly picture quality, ok its poly carbonite build, but hey it looks good it feels good and most importantly it deliveres the goods, i take care of my equipment, (always have) and it takes care of me, i love this camera, its incredible, if u do purchase one, let me know what u think, cheers for now my friend and good luck over Xmas, new year period.

Hey Fish Lips, I tried to check out your link to photos at 500px, but it only took me to a sign up page. Anyway, seriously thinking about this FZ1000, if image quality and auto focus is better. My Canon SX510 dose not focus well toward infinity, and it's manual focus is tedious. Also, it's picked up some internal dust or maybe moisture evaporation that causes a small light grey blotch. It can be seen on the LCD, and I have to PP it out of the final image by cropping or cloning.

"Sadly, the FZ1000 doesn't offer a touch screen."I disagree. I wouldn't buy it if it has a touch screen. All photographers are not working in studio or preparing photos for hours.When travelling, walking, hiking, you often cannot keep your hands clean enough for a good use of touch screen.

I don't really understand the whole "I wouldn't by camera X if it had feature Y" sentiment in cases where you can turn feature Y off.

My GM5 has a touch screen. I don't really like touch screens. So I turned it off. Done. Same with every other camera I've owned that has had a touch screen. Of course some cameras have touch screens that you can't turn off [completely] but Panasonic seem to be a bit smarter than that these days, at least with the enthusiast models.

My concern would be accidentally touching the screen. My daughter cracks up at me using my iPad - "Dad, you need to learn to internet better. Oh, and try not to keep touching, brushing and tapping the screen."

Word! I think if this camera cost anymore, people would not buy it. It's already way too close to the GH4. It's a clear case of eating Sony's market share. Connect your smartphone and you have your touch screen.

I am happy the FZ1000 does not have a touchscreen as well, I would not use it really and it would add up to the price of the camera unnessesary. I really would be mad if I had invested in a very expensive GH4 for 4K video only and see the FZ1000 is way cheaper shortly after lol....it's a bit like buying a Canon Eos 5D MKIII for photographs only and see the Canon 6D is launched shortly after which was almost half the price.

I wasn't planning to get any new cameras these days, but when the review of the FZ1000 came out, I just realised that this might just be the camera I've been waiting for since I got a Canon 350D over a Panasonic FZ30 - mostly due to concerns over base ISO noise with the small 1/1.7 sensor.

So far, I am impressed. The lens is sharper than I'd have expected at the long range, a bit mushy in the corners at the wide end, as I'd have thought, but not enough to be any cause for concern.

Stabiliser works a dream, and the programming of the camera is done right. It seems to go to 1/60s exposure at full zoom before increasing the ISO. This gives me sharp pictures every time the way I hold my camera. I've also had sharp ones down to 1/4 leaning against a door frame.

Though zooming with a mechanically coupled lens is always preferable, I found myself quickly adjusting to the power zoom, using the ring around the shutter, using the ring on the lens for manual focus assist.

I read a review complaining that you needed to move the focus ring a certain speed before it registered and moved focus. It would have been nice to adjust this feature. It's obviously there to prevent focus creep, but people might have different preferences. Even the first time I used the ring, though, I had no problem getting good manual focus.

ISO up to 1600 is as clean as I'd want it. 1600 already has some noise, but it's nice noise that I actually like as it adds a bit of life and texture to my photos. 3200 is okay, but 6400 I'd avoid.

My old M43 system has a one stop advantage noise-wise - as is to be expected, but for most uses, the stabiliser's effectiveness will actually make up for any shortcomings in ISO noise performance for my use of the camera.

For the way I shoot, this camera, its zoom range, its controls, the lens and image quality - it's a one-stop shop covering all the bases I need covered, and I will only need to keep a tiny compact camera as well for the days I want to travel light, and I've got everything I need.

Well done, Panasonic. I knew you had it in you when I looked at the FZ30 all those years ago and felt it wasn't quite there yet.

when i moved from panasonic to Sony's camp in 2010 it was after seeing there is not gonna be what a lot of bridgecamera users were begging for ...a bigger sensor bridge camera .

i love my SLR's ..but even a little nex camera and a 4/3 requires that pesky lens change /carry . dealing with sensor noise and what not . all things get in the way of capturing that moment.

i think this fz1000 is the first step towards a complete camera in my mind and with sensor and processor tech advancement the 1inch category at least in iso terms surpassed some of the lower end SLR's ..or older models . i need to see some numbers on DR and colorrichness but for pure ISO this 1inch cam gives a better result than my A580.

This is the kind of camera I can see people buying as a compliment to a dslr outfit and then hardly ever using the dslr outfit.

There is one caveat to that though and it is that problem highlighted in the review about the single control dial. Anyone used to dual dials with exposure compensation on one and aperture the other for example (as I have my camera set up) would be driven mad by this ergonomic compromise. And that kind of thing can actually spoil your enjoyment of the using the gear.

People naturally and unconsciously gravitate to well designed easy to use kit.

On a more general point this and the RX10 are obviously intended to be great travel cameras so why no GPS?

I use it all the time on my camera and it seems an obvious feature to have on a travel camera.

My Lumix GH2 has the single wheel that clicks. I shoot manual, so I click it to switch between A and S but it doesn't bother me at all. It's quick and simple and I don't turn both at the same time anyway so it doesn't slow me down at all.

To be honest i would think the single control dial is quicker, `it must be` if you need to quickly capture that unexpected shot, then surely if you adjust say, the `exposure` first, then simply press `the same dial` then adjust your aperture, `all` with the same` thumb, then take the shot `must` be quicker than twidling around with your fingers with `2 dials` give me Panasonics single system anytime!

Pany has put all the goodies in one package [incl Time Lapse + a sensor larger than 2/3] I've been wanting in one package. . . though I do like the top LCD & body that the RX10 has, the FZ1000 wins out. This will be my every day snapshot + video clip camera. . . still will be using my Nikon & Canon APS SLRs for the 'special'/more serious use photos.

For me, the timelapse function is also very nice, I have seen some on youtube and I am very impressed (although I do timelapses mostly on my Canon 6D with a timer remote). I ordered mine yesterday and will use it as everyday snapshot and 4k video camera as well.

A little size. Also, potentially lens sharpness. I'm not sure about that Tamron 16-300, but most superzooms are pretty bad at the long end, and I know at least the RX10 is suppose to be pretty sharp out at 200 corner to corner. I know I had a Nikon 18-200 on a D7000 for a few months as a travel kit when on motorcycle rides and it was so bad I sold the lens. Useless beyond 150 or so. And while the APC sensor has much better high ISO, the 2 stops of lens speed will make up for that.

I discovered a very good reason! Take a handhold shot of a night scene with 600 equivalent focal lenght and 1/30s or slower with this camera and with a DSLR. Look at the pictures in detail and you´ll notice that the DSLR give vertical lines on each luminous point from the city lamps while Lumix keep the lamps as points. This is due the vertical oscilation created by the mirror shock. You need a very solid tripod to try to minimize this on a DSLR. And I tell you, if in a nigh shot it moves, it moves in daylight too. This can be a reason for lack of sharpness on DSLR because in a daylight photo this oscilation will appear as blur. The Lumix OIS do an excelent job compensating hand shake, but no VR, OIS, IS or whatever can compensate de high frequency shock of the mirror.

This appears now that DSLRs get lighter and photos are show on large screen TVs! In the past, with massive cameras and lenses, smaller prints and no image stabilzation imposing every night shot was on a tripod make difficult to anyone notice the mirror induced oscilation.

"I discovered a very good reason! Take a handhold shot of a night scene with 600 equivalent focal lenght and 1/30s or slower with this camera and with a DSLR. Look at the pictures in detail and you´ll notice that the DSLR give vertical lines on each luminous point from the city lamps while Lumix keep the lamps as points. This is due the vertical oscilation created by the mirror shock."

Not with a Sony SLT or any of the mirrorless competition. They don't have flapping mirrors either. Some like the Sony SLT's, even have electronic first curtain shutters reducing any potential vibration even more.

@AmateurSnaps I used to have the 350D. When it came out, it was the first really good affordable DSLR. I was actually considering a bridge superzoom at the same time, the Panasonic FZ30, but, though I liked the design of t, I felt I was compromising too much on image quality with its small sensor, images even at ISO 80 needing some cleaning.

If you do wish to upgrade, the FZ1000 is a good choice, and a significant one in terms of image quality over the aging technology of the 350D. Better low light performance, better dynamic range, higher resolution. And the all-in-one lens design is very convenient.

The FZ1000 lens is very good considering its range. I have heard people say the long end is soft, but I think it's much, much better than Panasonic's 45-200mm and 100-300mm for M43 in that regard, which is what I am comparing it to.

Some say it's expensive. But just buying a lens of that range and quality would cost about the same.

"The equivalent aperture figure gives a 'clear' idea of how two lenses compare in terms of depth-of-field."So when I go to DoF calculator, do I put in real f-stop or equivalent aperture and how is this clearer than putting in FL and f-stop as it used to be?And if you put on FF f/2.0 lens on an 4/3 body, the equivalent aperture becomes f/4.0 while the equivalent aperture was f/2.0 when it was on an FF body? How is this clear and to whom is this clear?Well, at least you didn't say FZ1000 is faster than FZ200...Moreover, this review would have been more interesting if compared to Nikon 1 maybe with 10-100mm lens.IMHO, of course.

You need to give it a rest, because you're still being intentionally obtuse. Does your DoF calculator work with real or equivalent FL? If real, then you use 145/2.8. If equivalent, you put 400/11. If you mix them up you get the wrong answer in your DoF calculator.

As for if you put the FF f/2.0 lens on 4/3 body, then do you change the FL or do you believe the FL stays the same? These have all been explained to you a hundred times already.

Panasonic is sharper on the right side (lock at the lower brush) and Sony on the left side (top brush or lower grass). Are both camera with a missaligned element in their lenses or the cameras lenses are not at the same distance to the four corners of the scene (tripod out of perpendicularism to the scene axis)? Note that get the scene centered in the viewer don´t means the camera is perpendicular to scene plane.

Just a question, as I assume there must be some FZ1000 owners out there too checking out this forum: I know the close-focus is 3cm at the wide angle of the lens, but what is it at full extension telephoto, and what is the equivalent magnification ratio at either 25mm or 400mm equivalent?

Despite a bit of googling, I've not been able to find the data for this anywhere yet.

On page 8 of this review, under SPECs Comparisons, we see that both are 3cm when wide and 30cm for 200mm equivalente of Sony and 100 cm (1m) for 400mm of Panasonic. On the same page, at the first Picture, you can see that real focal range of Panasonic is 9.1-146mm. Usually you need to calculate the increase of distance between focal plane and lens plane due close-focus, but these lenses do close-focus by internal shift, so I presume that they keep almost the same focal distance to near focus. I bet for Panasonic a magnification ratio of 9.1/30 [mm] for wide angle and 146/1000 [mm] for tele. If you take the captured image as being Leica format (full frame), you can use the equivalent focal distance. Then, 25/30 for wide angle and 400/1000 for telephoto. The same can be done for Sony, for equivalent wide is 24/30 and tele is 200/300 (all values in mm). I think this give a good approach.

If Sony cuts the RX10 price, that would be actionable news. An RX10ii (or RX12?) with 4k would also be actionable. 60p 4k, even if limited to short clips, would be a knockout. Firmware with 4k, even if feasible, seems unlikely.

Not quite continuous. I made some testshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nz2U0Aou4ZwI have more I can upload eventually.If you use iZoom then there is a stop between the optical and digital part. Otherwise the speed is not even and smooth so for video it might be tricky to zoom nicely. If you learn to use the slowest speed and zoom only about 2x in a case then it can be ok.

I live in India and plan to buy a new Camera in the next 2-3 months for photographing Landscapes & Wildlife and also family occasions. I was planning to buy a Nikon D5200 with a Nikkor 18-140 Lens which I was getting for approx US$850 (INR 50000). For the very long wildlife shots (which are not many) I planned to buy a 40X or more bridge camera in future.

But is buying only the Panasonic DMC FZ 1000 and nothing else a more logical option ?

Also is the Nikon D5200 with a average lens (Nikkor 18-140) not very much better than what the FZ 1000 with its Lieca ?

One more isssue....dust. I just read somewhere that amongst the Nikkor 18-105 and 18-140 the latter has "better" dust sealing. But there is no such issue of dust sealing in FZ1000.

Hi Ashokvashisht,There is a lot of sense in your logic. Yes less risk of dust on the sensor but it is not weatherproof (splash proof, dust proof). Neither is the Nikon. And yes Canon/Nikon budget lenses are not sharp. I have the Sony RX100 with the same sensor and I can say the quality out of these images are SLR quality. I also have an Olympus OM-D E-M1 and love it also except it is inconvenient changing lenses.

I am really curious if the FZ1000 can be effectively used to shoot college and high school sports? Namely, football in poorly lit high school stadiums at night or hockey in less than professional rinks. Anyone used this camera for those purposes or something close that would tell me if this is a wise choice? I freelance for a major city newspaper shooting high school and college sports and need the reach of the zoom on this, as there is nothing comparable in the Fuji X-T1 lens line at present.

From a speed perspective, and set to say ISO 3200 to keep the shutter speed high for a night game, I think you would be fine, but there is no weather sealing and the body is plastic, so that would worry me for your usage. The autofocus is very, very fast and the 400mm reach would be fantastic.

My FZ1000 is used for stage work — dancers & musicians in performance & back stage. After two major 3-day Jazz festivals — both with indoor & outdoor stages — & many other club/stage gigs...the FZ1000 could do the job.

As for weather proofing, I'll just do as I have done with my cameras for 50-some years.

The 400mm reach plus a 1600 to 3200 ISO should be good.

I prefer to do as much in the camera as possible, so do use the digital zoom (in camera cropping) to "800mm." Set one of the function buttons to switch between 'raw+jpg' & 'jpg' to quickly turn DZ off/on. Just a thought.

Stage work — Theater light can be quite bad; especially off stage center. As for clubs…often downright terrible. Your newspaper will likely not want anything shot above 3200 with an FZ1000; noise leaps in at that point.

Photographing dance…not too different from photographing sports. Same comment applies to the very active musician; some figuratively do vigorous calisthenics on stage!

Re weather proofing; reference here is to the time-honored use of plastic bags & rubber bands. Your needs will definitely vary here as football games can continue in some rather nasty weather.

As for doing as much in-camera as possible…will your newspaper be wanting your shots immediately? If so, that jpg is your ticket while the raw file is for later use. This is also why I will crop in the camera via digital zoom. FYI—the FZ1000 must be set for jpg-only if DZ is wanted, so, changing the image quality functions as the DZ off/on switch.

Rob Klein — What do you currently use? The X-T1 has got to be a great choice…but! the long lenses…not here yet. Do you have a long lens from your current system that can be adapted to the Fuji? Buy a used, useful lens now & sell it after a Fuji lens is available? This does not sound like a good solution, but, maybe a good tele-extender might work for you?

I shot an amature hockey game at an indoor rink used for high school hockey with an FZ1000 that I'd had for one week at that point. Autofocus and zoom were perfect, but with the lens at 4.0 virutally all of the time there wasn't enough light to get crisp shots most of the time. When a shot did work though, it was really great. I told my friend, who's sons I was taking pictures of, that he'll need to keep bringing his dslr as the FZ1000 wasn't going to cut it for indoor hockey.

Something that helps me in low stage light is a monopod with a snugged ball head — reduce unnecessary movement at my end. Not the same problem as very fast action, but, if you have one, it's worth a try with or without the ball head.

Can someone explain aperture before I decide to get this camera? My decision is between adding a superzoom 18-300 Nikkor to my old Nikon D60 DSLR or going with the fz1000. But as far as I can see, the fz1000 only has a minimum aperture of 8, where the nikkor 18-300 superzoom lens has minimum aperture of 32. The dp review only mentions the maximum aperture - I don't understand why. thanks

"the fz1000 only has a minimum aperture of 8, where the nikkor 18-300 superzoom lens has minimum aperture of 32."

It is purely technical limitation of how small the aperture can be made. Beyond the limit, mechanics becomes very tricky, while the IQ deteriorates too much (due to diffractions) to be of any use.

The minimum apertures for systems are: m43 - f/16, APS-C - f/22, 35mm format - f/32. That means, the lenses designed for the system *must* allow closing aperture to this diameter.

Generally, smaller the sensor, larger the min aperture f-number would be. E.g. on m43, the aperture diameter of f/32 (if it had allowed one) at 25mm would be (25/32 = ) 0.78mm!

It is simpler for the fixed lens cameras. Here, manufacturers have the free hand how to design the aperture. Some decide to make the aperture closing to a very small diameter - some not. Why the FZ1000 has min aperture of f/8 is the question only Panasonic can answer. E.g. Sony RX10 has min aperture of f/11.

In the Review Files for the FZ100 there are 6 files listed. Their extension turns out to be RW2. My Lightroom 4 handles my FZ200 camera files that are RW2. My Lightroom will not process the downloaded files that have the RW2 extension. Specifications say file extension is ARW for the FZ1000. Anyone find the same issue? Can somesone at DPREVIEW explain what is going on? (10/20/14)

Where to buy FZ1000 in Hong Kong / Singapore?Can anyone recommend a store where it can be found? I searched all over the web and could not find even one shop in SG / HK that sells it. I am there next week.

So it's a like Stop less in background blur isolation than a kit lens on a crop DSLR. Including worse Bokeh quality. Not with light; but in terms of DOF eqiv, and it's huge. That's not good. Not at the price.

They should NOT have listened to novices as to lusting for ZOOM X-FACTOR and just made a better camera. They should have capped the focal at 100mm (eqiv angle) and went the other way! Heck, they should have done 27-100mm on MFT. Made that a f/2.8 CONSTANT lens (built-in, so very IQ optimized optimized) and then you'd have something. Think about it. There's your do all camera. Mid small size, affordable price. Leica F2.8 27-100mm HELLO! They could even sell "X-FACTOR" extenders to the silly crowd.

You missed the entire point of the camera. Consumers want ease of use with a respectable range to take care of all needs. I doubt the target of this camera will ever shoot in A Priority, and has no clue what a 2.8 constant lens is. Amateur demand pays the light bill, not the 'professional' crowd, and with today's competition, a 27-100 would simply disappear in the sea of cameras already on the market, and not provide Panasonic with a consumer flagship product that where it trumps the competition. For what it is, its a great little piece.

They could have done that. But there are other excellent cameras in that range! What's the point of a "Superzoom" without a superzoom lens pray? It's for people who want a large zoom range - e.g Bird photographers for example.

What are all these other "excellent cameras in that range?". I didnt realize there were so many fixed lens 400mm range cameras with 1 inch sensors...RX10 costs a fortune with half the range.Stylus 1 is good but 1/1.7 inch sensor.FZ200 is good but some want better overall image quality and are willing to sacrifice range.

Your color sensitivity then your highlight range (not just total) and finally noise in real world lighting make small sensors (1" being still on the small performace side) craptasitc. Going small by smaller sensors is NOT the way to IQ. "X-factor ultra zooms", like that stink. If it were under $80 and you don't need image quality but in the bright sun, then fine. Because VALUE (price) does matter. It's way over priced and now you know why. Gold platting the darn thing doesn't count. It's a camera and cameras gather light more or less craptasically.

There is a firmware update coming SOON (maybe now) from Panasonic, which might solve some issues I see posted here....see this link:http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2750546856/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz1000-firmware-update-enables-4k-photo-mode

Wow. Amazing Camera. You would probably be better off with another camera if you just wanted to "point and shoot" (which, with today's cameras will still produce an excellent camera), but if you are an enthusiast, like to read manuals, know settings, experiment, and take lots of pictures, this could be the perfect camera. And it still does amazing in the automatic, point and shoot mode. Am selling my 70D and all my lenses ... too much of a pain to carry around anyway!

I replaced a Canon 7D with this, for a large number of reasons including image stabilization which is ridiculously amazing, autofocus speed, low light focusing speed in particular, 400mm reach and 4K video. Panorama capabilities, built-in intervalometer and focus peaking are just icing. Infact there are things I can do with this camera I can't do with my 5D MK III, although I am not getting rid of it any time soon.

I have owned the FZ150 for 2 years now and as far as a "complete" caamera it is the best camaera I have ever owned. Look at the front of the lens... It says LEICA. Sony has taken Carl Zeiss down the tubes. My first Leica was given to me by my grandmother at 9 years old. I have owned the Sony A99, the Canon 5D Mark III, and a zillion other expensive cameras, and I still stick by the FZ150. Recently duringa big "moon" shoot, I was able to hand hold the FZ150 at 600 mm and take wonderful shots of the moon. It gets a little off at low light shots, but I jsut add a flash. Wouldn't trade it for a Hassalblad

it didn't work, even by changing the shutter The flash still didn't fire all the time in iA or iA+. Sometimes I heard 1 pic being taken, other times a series of pics. Just don't understand it . Any ideas would be lovely